• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Spoilers Riverdale

We'll see how it goes but I liked it enough to try it again though I'm not sure how long that'll last. Made me wish to be young again lol. I spent a good deal of the episode trying to figure out who Betty reminded me of, Brittany Murphy FWIW.
 
I spent a good deal of the episode trying to figure out who Betty reminded me of, Brittany Murphy FWIW.

For part of yesterday, I had the feeling I'd seen Camila Mendes (Veronica) somewhere before, but apparently this is her screen debut. I have no idea who she reminds me of.
 
I'm not that familiar with Mila Kunis, so I doubt that's it.
On IMDB they say she looks like Phoebe Tomkins on The Originals though I'm not familiar with that show. Also, Vanessa Hudgens of the upcoming Powerless.

I was surprised to see that this is her screen acting debut, it doesn't show AFAIC.
 
On IMDB they say she looks like Phoebe Tomkins on The Originals though I'm not familiar with that show. Also, Vanessa Hudgens of the upcoming Powerless.

I'm not familiar with either of those, either.

I've heard it said in the past that beautiful women (and presumably men too) tend to look alike, because we judge beauty in terms of symmetry and, paradoxically, average-ness. When numerous different faces are morphed together and averaged out, we tend to find the result attractive and idealized. I used to be skeptical of this idea, and I still feel that a number of the women I've personally found the most stunning had quite distinctive features in one way or another, but over time, I've come to realize that a lot of actresses, models, and the like do tend to fall into certain recurring types in terms of facial structure. So it's kind of inevitable that one will remind us of others.
 
Tastemade is promoting Riverdale with recipes inspired by food eaten in Archie Comics.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

And here's a clip from Late Night with Seth Meyers...

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Iidn't know that this was Mendes' first role. Then I thought that maybe she had a strong theatre background but it looks like she just got lucky. She attended NYU, went to a few auditions for other roles which she didn't get and then got this.
 
This episode felt kind of like the second half of the pilot, and I don't mean that in a bad way. Chapter 1 (and the episodes are actually titled as chapters) left everything so uneasy and troubled, so this one offered some reassurance for Archie fans, bringing the core friendships back together and ending up with the classic image of Archie, Jughead, Betty, and Veronica sharing sundaes at the diner. It's interesting that they're trying to reinvent and darken it, yet be faithful to the core nostalgic elements and characters at the same time -- which is an approach that I gather has been pretty successful in Archie Comics in recent years.

Speaking of which, I was amused when I realized that Jughead warning Archie about how Ms. Grundy was manipulating him was kind of a modernized twist on Jughead's classic role as the guy who rejects the whole idea of romance and warns Archie about being led astray by girls. (In the current comics, Jughead is openly asexual; I gather that the higher-ups have rejected that idea for Riverdale's version of Jughead, though the actor reportedly would like to play him that way.) I'm uneasy with that whole subplot, though, because what Grundy is doing is statutory rape, and the way she manipulated Archie here felt rather predatory. But Archie still sees it as a romance. I just hope the writers don't really see it that way.

Another key bit of nostalgia was the Pussycats' cover of "Sugar, Sugar," the hit song that originated on Filmation's The Archie Show cartoon back in 1969. I guess that's coming full circle, since that was the first Archie TV series.
 
I would have ended the episode with Archie, Jughead, Betty, and Veronica in the diner. I realize convention here demanded a cliffhanger, which is why we had the subsequent scene of Cheryl being arrested, but the iconic moment in the diner would have been a more emotionally powerful ending.

Nice to see that Reggie Mantle remains an asshole in any continuity.

I keep wondering if what we're seeing is real or if it's the skewed interpretation of real from Jughead's novel-in-progress on Jason's murder. Because why is Jughead already writing a novel about Jason's murder?
 
They really did a crazy 180 with Reggie this episode after having him be all buddy-buddy with Archie in the premiere.
 
I would have ended the episode with Archie, Jughead, Betty, and Veronica in the diner. I realize convention here demanded a cliffhanger, which is why we had the subsequent scene of Cheryl being arrested, but the iconic moment in the diner would have been a more emotionally powerful ending.

For Archie fans who valued the nostalgia, sure. But presumably those are a minority of the viewing audience. The scene wouldn't have as much resonance to newcomers, to people who are watching for the teen-soap-meets-Twin-Peaks aspects or for the sake of KJ Apa's apparent allergy to shirts.


I keep wondering if what we're seeing is real or if it's the skewed interpretation of real from Jughead's novel-in-progress on Jason's murder. Because why is Jughead already writing a novel about Jason's murder?

Before, he was writing about the impact of Jason's death on the community. The fact that it's a murder is a new twist. I suspect that what we're getting is an amalgam of his initial writing of notes and journals in real time (what we see on camera) and the final, revised text after the fact (what we hear in voiceover).


They really did a crazy 180 with Reggie this episode after having him be all buddy-buddy with Archie in the premiere.

Reggie wasn't exactly buddy-buddy there. He was praising Archie's new buffness, but at the same time was basically accusing him of using steroids to achieve it. So he was still being a jerk.

It's interesting how the characters' archetypal personality traits are still in effect, but applied to a darker story. Archie is still the teen who loses his mind over any pretty girl he sees, which is translated into being susceptible to seduction and manipulation by an older woman. Reggie is still a bully and a jerk, but now he's accusing people of murder instead of just playing dumb pranks. And so on.
 
For Archie fans who valued the nostalgia, sure. But presumably those are a minority of the viewing audience.
As one of the nostalgic fans, the diner scene with the four iconic characters sitting there was of interest, but I agree the younger audience not fully familiar with the mythos would not get it.
Yes, Archie does seem to have a significant shirt allergy of late.
 
The second episode was better by virtue of less angst, but still at the upper tolerance limits for me, but since I haven't watched a murder mystery show in a while I might just stick around.

Betty and Veronica are the most interesting characters on it... I suppose in the "canon" there's no version of the triangle where Archie's the one left out? ;)
 
The scene underlined that faux lesbianism is boring and you're a chump if you fall for it.

That bit did kinda feel like the producers wanted to get the inevitable girl-on-girl smooch out of the way as quickly as possible, then move on.

Binge-watched the first two eps tonight. I'm intrigued enough to stick around for awhile, although I fear for its effects on my diet. Way too much talk of burgers and milkshakes! :)
 
Don't worry, you just have to work construction over the summer like Archie did to turn any spare tire you might have, into an 8 pack.

Do we like like Jughead's beanie/crown?
 
I'm wondering if they're going to offer plausible, modern-day explanation for why everyone calls him "Jughead."

Not an original observation, but it's been pointed out elsewhere that the pop-culture references on this show are oddly retro. In the first two eps alone, these 21st-century teenagers have name-dropped Truman Capote, "Our Town" by Thornton Wilder, the Joan Crawford version of "Mildred Pierce," AND Montgomery Clift, "pre-accident."

Mind you, I've barely set foot in a high school since the seventies, but are modern teens really that culturally literate when it comes to vintage plays and movies? My impression is that most of them are only barely aware of any movie or TV show made before 1975 or later . . . .
 
Last edited:
Think of the video store from Stars Hollow.

Ancient catalogue, nothing new.

Riverdale doesn't seem like it could attract a wholefoods.

Have they mentioned their internet?

Cheap itunes movies vs. illegally streaming almost everything.

Are we sure that this is set in modern day?

Remember the Twin Peak's Parody on Psych?

The town that didn't want broad band.

Disecting Frogs.

I watched Doctor Who School Reunion a few weeks ago, where Sarah Jane comes back to meet 10, where Rose has a rant about how old Sarah-Jane is. If they don't still dissect frogs in Britain 10 years ago, why on earth would they still do that in America, the hub of all things progressive, today?

Unless they are trying for sliding time like Gotham does?

Setting the story in a present day that looks like the past?

Shit.

What?

John Doyle of The Globe and Mail describes the show as having “the look of a drama set in the recent past — that period to which Donald Trump refers when he brays about making America great again — but it is emphatically set in the present. A present in which Veronica can be designated as looking like Betty Draper in a certain season of ‘Mad Men.’”

Mad Men Season 5. 2012. AD.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top